Archived: Highgrove Care Home

Updated 4 November 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. The home was previously inspected in February 2016, where three breaches of legal requirements were identified.

The inspection was unannounced, which meant that the provider and staff did not know that the inspection was going to take place. It took place over two days, 21 September and 23 September 2016. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors and a pharmacy inspector.

To help us to plan and identify areas to focus on in the inspection we considered all the information we held about the service, including notifications submitted to CQC by the provider and information from other agencies.

At the time of our inspection there were 31 people using the service. We spoke with people who were using the service to gain their views about the care they received. We also spoke with staff members, the registered manager and a member of the provider’s senior management team.

We observed care taking place in the home, and observed staff undertaking various activities, including handling medication, supporting people to eat and using specific pieces of equipment to support people’s mobility. In addition to this, we undertook a Short Observation Framework for Inspection (SOFI) SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the care records for five people using the service and records relating to the management of the home. This included meeting minutes, medication records, staff recruitment and training files and surveys completed by people’s relatives. We also reviewed records used to monitor the quality of the service provided and how the home was operating.

Updated 4 November 2016

The inspection took place over two days; 21 September and 23 September 2016, and was unannounced. We last inspected the service in February 2016, where concerns were identified in relation to how the provider ensured people were cared for safely; how the provider ensured they were acting in accordance with the legal requirements around consent; and the provider’s arrangements for ensuring it provided an effective and well managed service. At that inspection we rated the service as Requires Improvement.

Highgrove Care Home is a 78 bed nursing home, providing care to older adults with a range of support and care needs. At the time of the inspection there were 31 people living at the home. The home is divided into four discrete units, although the provider had stopped using two of the units and therefore only two were in use at the time of the inspection.

Highgrove Care Home is located in Mexborough, a small town in Doncaster, South Yorkshire. The home is known locally as Highgrove Manor. It is in its own grounds in a quiet, residential area, but close to public transport links.

At the time of the inspection, the service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff interacted with people warmly and with respect. People’s privacy and dignity was upheld when staff were carrying out care tasks. Care plans were devised in such a way as to ensure that good care was supported effectively. Where people’s health needs changed, the provider responded promptly, engaging external healthcare professionals and altering the way people were cared for, as required.

There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk of abuse and to assess and monitor potential risks to individual people. Recruitment processes were safe and we saw there were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs.

The provider had appropriate arrangements to make sure people received their medications safely, although some improvements were required. We also noted that some staff needed to make improvements to their hygiene practices.

People told us they enjoyed their meals at the home, and our observations corroborated this. People’s nutrition and hydration were closely monitored to ensure they maintained good health.

The provider had appropriate arrangements in place to ensure that it adhered to the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005

There was a comprehensive programme of activities, both in the home and within the community.

There were thorough systems in place for auditing the service, to ensure that people received care which was safe and of a good quality.

Staff told us they felt well supported to undertake their roles, although the provider’s formal supervision programme was not yet fully embedded.